CURRENT MEAT-RELATED WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES OF FREE STATE RED-MEAT ABATTOIRS, SOUTH AFRICA

H. Roberts1 and L. de Jager2

1

Central University of Technology, Department of Environmental Development and Agriculture, Private Bag X20539, Bloemfontein, South Africa, 9300. E-mail: robertsh@tfs.ac.za 2 Central University of Technology, School of Health Technology, Bloemfontein, South Africa.

Increased amounts of waste are generated all over the world. Abattoirs are one of the industries that contribute to the problem of possible food-borne diseases and potential health hazards associated with food, especially meat (Bradshaw, et.al. 1992; Nemerow and Dasgupta, 1991). Arendse and Godfrey quoted the statistics released by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) stating that South Africa generates more than 42 million cubic metres of solid waste per annum. Of this volume, 5 million cubic metre is hazardous waste (Arendse and Godfrey, 2002). Waste generated by abattoirs include condemned organs and carcasses, blood, hides, paunch content and carcass trimmings in South Africa. Condemned products and carcasses, unsuitable for human consumption, are eaten by cavengers or persons living off refuse sites, and could cause a significant health problem leading to possible disease and death. Current economic conditions force under-privileged communities to seek any possible food source and some of the sites frequented are landfill sites/sources, dumping grounds and disposal sites used by abattoirs (Personal communication, Derbyshire, 2003). South Africa currently does not have much legislation or Acts dealing with the disposal and handling of waste. South Africa is a member state to the Basel Convention, but that deals more with the control of trans-boundary movement of hazardous waste, like for example waste from the chemical industry, and its disposal (Lombard, 2000). In South Africa, the National Environmental Management Act (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA) was promulgated. Other legislation, for example the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act 108 of 1996), the Bill of Rights as well as the Abattoir Hygiene Act (Act No. 121 of 1992) and the regulations framed thereunder and the Safety of Meat Act (Act 40 of 2000) all play an important role in food and waste management (Lombard, 2000). The new Safety of Meat Act, Act 40 of 2000, replaces the Abattoir Hygiene Act. Currently only draft regulations on the new act is available. With the promulgation of the Act on Abattoir Hygiene in 1992 (Act 121 of 1992) and the privatisation of meat inspections in 1993, a serious void was created with respect to the control of condemned products, as the act allowed that meat inspectors could be directly employed by the abattoir owners. This situation led to consequent intimidation as a result of the economic loss associated with condemnations. Regulations framed under the Abattoir Hygiene Act, prescribes specific disposal methods, but financial constraints prohibit proper disposal as not all abattoirs possess incinerators, or else incorrect disposal methods are used in many cases. In most cases the incinerators does not function effectively. The Standing Regulations framed under the Abattoir Hygiene and Safety of Meat Act, form the basis for the handling and disposal of condemned products and came into effect in 1969. One of the most important aspects of meat hygiene performed by abattoirs are primary meat inspections and control of condemned products. Meat inspections serve no purpose if the condemned products find their way back into the food chain (Personal communication, Derbyshire, 2003). Internationally various waste management strategies are used for example, incineration, landfilling, anaerobic digestion, rendering or part-rendering of waste products. As in European countries there is a move away from incineration, countries world-wide are investigating alternative waste management systems. Regulations by the Commission of the European Communites have imposed more stringent controls with regards to landfilling and animal feeding (Salminen and Rintala, 2002).

Proceedings: 8th World Congress on Environmental Health; Produced by: Document Transformation Technologies Organised by SB Conferences

22 27 February 2004 Durban, South Africa ISBN: 0-9584663-7-8

Current South African waste disposal methods recommended for condemned products are: Incineration Denaturing Sterilisation in an approved sterilisation plant or Any other method as approved by the Director: Veterinary Public Health. Red-meat abattoirs (Grades A to E) in the Free State Province were visited and inspection sheets were completed by the researcher. Questionnaires were also completed by abattoir management and abattoir workers. Responses of completed management and workers questionnaires would facilitate a comparison between the responses of management and the work force and could be used to identify perceptions of management and labour forces regarding waste management practices and safety of use and disposal of condemned products. Results analysed for 49 of the 95 red meat abattoirs in the Free State Province, South Africa indicated a specific trend. It is evident that the most common method used for disposal of condemned products were burying (Figure 1). Some vulture feeding also took place as well as condemned products being processed into by-products.

Figure 1. Disposal methods used for condemned products. Some abattoirs indicated that they bury the condemned products. The condemned products are placed into a trench or hole dug in the ground. There are no specific required depth, as long as unauthorised persons cannot access it. The trench or hole is then covered with soil. Open fire burning took place where condemned products were burned on open fires fuelled by using car tyres or diesel. Only a small amount of incineration took place and some of the respondents who indicated that they incinerated the condemned products could not supply any temperature at which the incinerators operated. By product processing meant that the condemned products were processed into blood meal, carcass meal and bone meal. The blood meal and carcass meal were used for addition into pet food and bone meal were added to fertilisers used for roses and flowers. Some respondents indicated that they burnt some of the condemned products, but buried some other condemned products and some products were fed to vultures. As evident from Figure 1, the most common disposal method were burying. In Table 1, the areas where these condemned products were buried are discussed.

Table 1. Locations for burying condemned products.

LOCATIONS
Municipal landfill Private property/farms Abattoir premises Other premises

Number of abattoirs
14 16 7 1

When looking at Table 1, it is can be seen that municipal landfill sites as well as private property or farms were most commonly used for burying condemned products. The municipality would supply a site on municipal ground where the condemned products were buried. The burying of condemned products on private properties or farms took place widely as many of the abattoirs were situated on private property or farms. Other premises would indicate that the condemned products were transported from the place of slaughter and buried. The disposal of blood was also one of the areas where different disposal methods were used (Table 2). It is evident that most blood were disposed of into municipal/local authority drainage systems. The second most common disposal method for blood were run off into field. A variety of disposal methods are indicated in Table 2. Table 2. Methods of blood disposal.

LOCATION
Municipal drainage Oxidation dams Buried Run-off into fields By products Reclaimed Farm Other methods

Number of abattoirs 20 3 6 8 4 3 2 2

The blood which has to be disposed of, were mostly removed by municipal drainage systems for which abattoirs mostly had to pay a levy as they placed strain on the drainage system. Some blood were buried. At eight abattoirs blood were allowed to run off into the fields (farm land). The blood disposed as by products were processed into blood meal, which was added as an ingredient into pet food and not used for human consumption at all. Three abattoirs indicated that they reclaimed the blood but did not supply any information regarding the use thereof. Two abattoirs indicated that blood were disposed of on the farm and two abattoirs indicated that they applied another method of disposal.

Figure 2. Disposal of stomach content.

Stomach contents are another product which required disposal. It is evident from the data depicted in Figure 2 that most stomach contents were removed from abattoir premises by municapalites and buried (n = 15). Two abattoirs indicated that the stomach content entered the municipal drainage system. A large number of abattoirs (n = 13) buried the stomach content. Composting, to a lesser extent, were one of the disposal methods used for stomach contents (n = 4). A large component of the abattoirs (n = 11) indicated that the stomach contents were spread onto the fields. Only two abattoirs burnt the stomach contents and two abattoirs removed the stomach contents to other places. A large amount of water are used in abattoirs for slaughtering and cleaning purposes. The most common disposal method used for waste water were municipal drainage systems (Table 3). Run-off into fields were seen as the second most frequently used disposal method. Oxidation dams, french drains as well as tanks taken to municipalities or disposal of waste water into closed systems, before it is allowed to flow onto the fields, were used to a lesser extent. Table 3. Waste water disposal methods. METHOD OF DISPOSAL Municipal drainage French drains Closed systems into fields Run-off into fields/dams Oxidation dams Into tank removed to municipality

Number of abattoirs
26 2 5 13 2 1

Two questions were asked to determine the perceptions of the abattoir owners and abattoir staff regarding the necessity of disposing of condemned products as well as to determine if they considered the consumption of condemned products by humans as safe. In only two cases, 2 abattoirs (Table 4), indicated that they did not consider the disposal of condemned products necessary and the same respondents indicated that they considered it safe to supply these condemned products to humans for consumption. Table 4 indicates that the majority of the abattoirs considered disposal of condemned products necessary. Table 4. Perceptions of importance of disposal and safety of condemned products. Disposal of condemned products necessary Condemned products safe for human consumption Yes 46 2 No 2 46

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Although this study is not yet completed, a definite trend is evident. Burying of condemned products were the most popular disposal method as expected. The disposal of waste water and stomach contents were mainly disposed into the municipal drainage system or removed by the municipality. This places additional strain on the disposal systems of municipalities/local authorities and in some cases the levy paid by abattoirs for the disposal of blood, stomach contents and waste water have a negative economic influence on the abattoirs. It is also a known fact that burying of condemned products are not always the best option as unauthorised persons could access the disposal sites (Personal communication, Derbyshire, 2003). When there is no other alternative but burying, strict access control should be exercised. It is recommended that for the disposal of stomach contents the composting option should be investigated as this method is not fully exploited. The question of pollution of underground water is also raised. Blood were also one of the waste products produced by slaughtering and discarded by most of the abattoirs as waste material. Blood which is high in proteins, could possibly be processed into a food source, for example when dried it could be used as an ingredient for soup, or animal or pet food. In Germany, for example, blood is used to produce Bloodwurst (Blood wors). South African waste management could be dramatically improved by searching for better disposal methods as well as considering recycling to a larger extent.

REFERENCES
[1] Abattoir Hygiene Act, 1992 (Act. No. 121 OF 1992), Pretoria, South Africa. [2] Act On Safety Of Meat, 2000 (Act No. 40 of 2000), Pretoria, South Africa. [3] Arendse, L. and Godfrey, L. 2002. Waste Management Indicators for national state of environment reporting. International Waste Management Biennial Congress, Durban. November 2002 (P. 268-275). [4] Lombard, J. 2002. Waste Management Legislation in South Africa. Notes. [5] Nemerow, N.L. and Dasgupta, A. 1991. Industrial and Hazardous Waste Treatment. Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York. [6] Salminen, E. and Rintala, J. Anaerobic digestion of organic solid poultry slaughterhouse waste a review. Bioresource Technology 83 (2002) 13-26. Personal Communication: DERBYSHIRE, W. 2003. The Provincial Executive Officer (Act 40 of 2002) of the Free State Province, South Africa.